OK, you're not wrong about mixing uses, but the problem is that all of our rail lines converge in a tight, 1/2-square mile area. Compare that to cities like NYC, London, Paris where the "central area" on the rail map looks more like a spaghetti bowl instead of a wagon wheel.
I'm not against diversifying neighborhoods, but we have to invest in the infrastructure to make it happen. Otherwise we end up like LA, with a bunch of mid job clusters around town and not enough critical mass to really make any of them transit-oriented.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruceP
I'd love to see all of them, but I'm not countin' on it. Since the end of WWII and the building of the 2 subway lines Downtown (and the incumbent re-routings) all we've added since then was the Blue Line extension to O'Hare in 1984 and the Orange Line in 1993.
As for the Red Line extension beyond 95th, I'll believe it when I see it. The only way we'll get a real expansion of the system is if the feds fully fund it and give it the priority that it gave the Interstate Highway System. Fat chance for that as long as there's one R in the Senate to filibuster it.
|
Keep in mind, we've re-built more rail lines than most cities have added over the same time period. The Pink Line was rebuilt from the ground-up, tracks and all, now we're doing the same for the North Red Line. The Green and Brown Line saw virtually every station completely rebuilt from the ground up. There's no lack of funding or engineering know-how in Chicago, we just lack the will. And that can be changed at the ballot box. Already I think we're seeing the will for the Red Line Extension. All the major politicians support it. It just sucks to squander that will and all those dollars in a declining part of town.